Prior to January 25, 2024, Princeton University’s campus was infested with “Personal Electric Vehicles” (PEVs) and their all-too-often self-indulgent owners who regularly bedeviled pedestrian students and visitors alike. On August 18, 2023, Princeton’s Environmental Safety and Risk Management Committee (ESRM) sent a campus-wide email announcing a policy update regarding PEVs. It cited safety concerns to argue that “the University’s infrastructure cannot safely accommodate the increasing usage of PEVs on campus without applying certain restrictions.” These new regulations included a ban during weekdays from 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and a speed limit of 10 miles per hour. A fair warning was included as well: “A failure to comply could result in a full prohibition of PEVs on campus.”
Despite Princeton’s initial warning, many Princeton students continued to use PEVs improperly. Surveying students would undoubtedly confirm Princeton’s general finding that policy violations were rampant. According to a December 4 email, “compliance with the new PEV restrictions has been low. Observational data collected by a third-party consultant as part of a broader mobility planning effort found nearly the same levels of e-scooter use during restricted hours in October 2023 as those seen in February 2023.” Thus, Princeton held true to its original warning and prohibited all PEVs, with the exception of “electric-assist” bicycles.
Two warring factions emerged from this new policy. The first group consists of those who relied on PEVs to navigate campus “efficiently.” It is not uncommon to hear students say, “I saved so much time” or complain about how long it now takes them to get to the E-Quad or Jadwin Gym. The second group is composed of those students, some of whom could actually be considered victims of PEVs, who appreciate the ban. Anecdotes about near-misses and actual accidents are readily available. Which group, though, makes a more convincing argument? Are PEVs really an unacceptable safety risk, demanded only by the indolent? Or are they necessary for more efficient travel around campus?
First, PEVs are, in fact, a safety concern. The title of an article published on September 25, 2023, in The Daily Princetonian reads, “Sparks fly between two scooters, cause fire in Whitman basement.” This event, rare as it might be, provides sufficient cause for apprehension. Scooters, for a number of reasons, are a safety-hazard. Beyond the risk of spontaneous combustion, they are obstructive, including in dorm hallways, where certain students, in a display of childish behavior, felt the occasional need to ride them. It would be difficult for many Princeton students to count the number of times they heard a fellow student talking about a near-death encounter with a PEV user. Prior to the ban, PEV users could be regularly observed weaving between pedestrians at inimical speeds, playing NASCAR on Princeton’s sidewalks. Collisions, too, were not a rare occurrence.
Returning to the December 4 email, the ESRM committee contended that “PEV users have routinely and increasingly been observed riding during the prohibited time periods, exceeding the 10mph speed limit, failing to yield to pedestrians, operating with two passengers on a single device, and riding while using headphones or other audio devices.” PEV operation with two passengers was not infrequent, and riding while using audio devices was certainly a common practice. (Certain university employees also operate Department of Facilities vehicles with headphones; this, however, is a topic for another time.) These behaviors, for obvious reasons, are dangerous, not least to the operators.
While the safety concerns of PEVs are clear, the convenience arguments may initially appear to hold more water. One might reasonably ask, “Is indolent really a fair characterization of PEV users?” A bit of context is necessary to answer this question. The longest distance a student might walk on campus is about 25 minutes at a regular pace, and this is likely an exaggerated case that does not reflect the average Princeton student’s schedule. Princeton, in short, is an extremely walkable campus, rendering claims that PEVs are a necessity for campus navigation a bit of a stretch. It is also worth noting that many of the students complaining about the inconvenience of walking are athletes who regularly trek to Jadwin Gym. The irony, here, speaks for itself.
Even if Princeton’s campus was not walkable, why not use a bicycle? (And no, I do not mean the electric bicycles that should have been banned with the rest of the PEVs.) After all, they are often just as convenient, with the added benefit of being cheaper. This counterargument is typically met with silence. Why? Proponents of PEVs are desperate for the return of their beloved, sloth-enabling devices. They think saving the slight effort is worth endangering us all. But is it really that terrible that Princeton is forcing us to consider safer, healthier, and cheaper alternatives to PEVs?
(Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.